The Islamabad High Court (IHC) was informed today that missing poet Ahmed Farhad Shah is in the custody of Dhirkot police in Azad Kashmir. This revelation came as IHC Senior Puisne Judge Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani resumed the hearing of a petition seeking Shah’s recovery.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan had called for Shah’s immediate release following his alleged abduction from his home on May 15. His wife filed a petition the same day, urging the court to find and produce Shah and to investigate and prosecute those responsible for his disappearance.
On May 16, Justice Kayani summoned a report from the defence secretary regarding the possible involvement of intelligence agencies in Shah’s disappearance. Last week, the judge urged intelligence agencies to clear their name from abduction allegations. Despite an inquiry, the court was informed that Shah was not in the custody of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
In a subsequent hearing, Justice Kayani ordered Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan to recover Shah within four days. AGP Awan assured the court he would take full responsibility. During today’s proceedings, AGP Awan, Additional Attorney General (AAG) Munawar Iqbal Duggal, and Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar were present. Senior journalist Hamid Mir, appointed as a judicial assistant, and petitioner’s counsel Advocate Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir also attended.
AGP Awan presented a police report confirming that Shah was arrested by Dhirkot police. Justice Kayani noted that Shah was apprehended near the Kohala bridge and detailed the jurisdictional fix.
According to the first information report (FIR), Shah was detained at around 8am for obstructing public servants in their duties. The FIR, filed by Kohala checkpost in-charge Shaukat, states that Shah misbehaved with checkpost officials and refused to comply with the checking protocol.
The case continues to raise questions about the role of state agencies in enforced disappearances. Justice Kayani has previously ordered live streaming of missing persons cases, although today’s hearing was not broadcast live.
This development marks a significant turn in the case, as the court continues to address the broader issue of missing persons and the accountability of state agencies.
